Than I propose you to create a gap between #200 and #300 and move the players, so that the #300-#400 spots could have two players on each position, so they can all be ranked as they deserve.
You were pointless actually. Than you came up with statistics and you are no more. But statistics aren't so relevant for me. I still think Donna would beat Anett. At least on hard, which is the most common surface.
But to start with the begining, I didn't ever say Donna is better than Anett, I've said I (me, myself) think that she is better. You could've told me your believings are the other way around and it would be fine, but you claim - as you always do - that your opinions are the right ones, meaning I was wrong.
And you defend Anett like I'm hating on her or something. No, you know I don't. I'm just telling my opinions, which may prove true, or may prove wrong and which aren't related at all with my preferences, but with my judgement.
There's a lot of facts that decide the winner of a match and indirect statistics (by indirect I mean not face to face statistics, but judging on matches against different other players) aren't one of them.
If you think Donna is not as good as people think, I wonder why do you always post there and criticise her schedule. On the other hand I believe in Anett.

And most important than everything is that it's not important at all who's better than whom. Both are promising players and when they will face each other, we shall see who's who.